Pushforwards in local coordinates

In summary: F^j = \frac{\partial}{\partial x^j}|_{p} \frac{\partial}{\partial y^j}|_{F(p)}} $$So, taking the Einstein summation convention, equation 3.6 says that the pushforward of a vector is just the sum of the pushforwards of its components.
  • #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
3,998
48
I am reading John M. Lee's book: Introduction to Smooth Manifolds ...

I am focused on Chapter 3: Tangent Vectors ...

I need some help in fully understanding Lee's conversation on computations with tangent vectors and pushforwards ... in particular I need help with an aspect of Lee's exposition of pushforwards in coordinates ... ...

The relevant conversation in Lee is as follows:
?temp_hash=0733a5fbbe29ee146dea39255470a6bb.png

?temp_hash=0733a5fbbe29ee146dea39255470a6bb.png
In the above text we read:

" ... ... Thus

[itex]F_* \frac{ \partial }{ \partial x^i } |_p = \frac{ \partial F^j }{ \partial x^i } (p) \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^j } |_{ F(p) } [/itex] ... ... ... ... 3.6In other words, the matrix of [itex]F_*[/itex] in terms of the standard coordinate basis is[itex]\begin{pmatrix} \frac{ \partial F^1 }{ \partial x^1 } (p) & ... & ... & \frac{ \partial F^1 }{ \partial x^n } (p) \\ ... & ... & ... & ... \\ ... & ... & ... & ... \\ \frac{ \partial F^m }{ \partial x^1 } (p) & ... & ... & \frac{ \partial F^m }{ \partial x^n } (p) \end{pmatrix}
[/itex]... ... ... "
My question is as follows:

How ... exactly ... do we get from equation 3.6 above to the fact that the matrix of \(\displaystyle F_*\) in terms of the standard coordinate basis is [itex]\begin{pmatrix} \frac{ \partial F^1 }{ \partial x^1 } (p) & ... & ... & \frac{ \partial F^1 }{ \partial x^n } (p) \\ ... & ... & ... & ... \\ ... & ... & ... & ... \\ \frac{ \partial F^m }{ \partial x^1 } (p) & ... & ... & \frac{ \partial F^m }{ \partial x^n } (p) \end{pmatrix}
[/itex]... ... ... ?It looks as if Lee derives [itex](F_*)_{ij} = \frac{ \partial F^j }{ \partial x^i } (p) [/itex] from 3.6 ... but how exactly is this justified ... that is, what are the mechanics of this ... I cannot see it ... can someone please help ... ..Peter*** EDIT ***

It has occurred to me that it would be helpful for readers of the post to have access to Lee's definition of pushforwards, and his early remarks on the properties of pushforwards ... ... so I am providing these as follows:

?temp_hash=7cf974035de97ce45d5835ab2784bf1a.png
 

Attachments

  • Lee - 1 - Pushforwards in Coordinates - PART 1 - Lee Page 70     ....png
    Lee - 1 - Pushforwards in Coordinates - PART 1 - Lee Page 70 ....png
    47.2 KB · Views: 785
  • Lee - 2 - Pushforwards in Coordinates - PART 2 - Lee Page 71     ....png
    Lee - 2 - Pushforwards in Coordinates - PART 2 - Lee Page 71 ....png
    41.1 KB · Views: 795
  • Lee - Definition and Properties of the Pushforward ... ....png
    Lee - Definition and Properties of the Pushforward ... ....png
    36.9 KB · Views: 892
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I really should not correspond with and talk with my self ... ...
frown.png
... ... but anyway ... have been reflecting on my post above ...

Equation 3.6, I have realized uses what Lee calls the Einstein Summation Convention and so reads [itex]F_* \frac{ \partial }{ \partial x^i } |_p = \sum_j \frac{ \partial F^j }{ \partial x^i } (p) \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^j } |_{ F(p) } [/itex] ... ... ... ... 3.6

and so for i = 1 we have

[itex]F_* \frac{ \partial }{ \partial x^i } |_p

= \frac{ \partial F^1 }{ \partial x^1 } (p) \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^1 } |_{ F(p) } + \frac{ \partial F^2 }{ \partial x^1 } (p) \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^2 } |_{ F(p) } + \frac{ \partial F^3 }{ \partial x^1 } (p) \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^3 } |_{ F(p) } + \ ... \ ... \ + \frac{ \partial F^m }{ \partial x^i } (p) \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^m } |_{ F(p) }[/itex][itex]= ( \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^1 } |_{ F(p) }, \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^2 } |_{ F(p) } , \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^3 } |_{ F(p) }, \ ... \ ... \ , \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^m } |_{ F(p) } )[/itex]

[itex] \times [/itex]

[itex]\begin{pmatrix} \frac{ \partial F^1 }{ \partial x^1 } (p) \\ \frac{ \partial F^2 }{ \partial x^1 } (p) \\ \frac{ \partial F^3 }{ \partial x^1 } (p) \\ ... \\ ... \\ \frac{ \partial F^m }{ \partial x^1 } (p) \end{pmatrix} [/itex]The column vector above is the first column vector of the required Jacobian ... ... taking [itex]i = 2[/itex] and proceeding in the same way gives column [itex]2[/itex] and so on ...

Is that correct?

Peter
 
  • #3
Yes that look correct. To see where it comes from:

Think about what I said in my other reply to your previous post; you can think of any vector ##v## as the tangent vector of a curve ##\alpha(t)## passing through ##p \in M## at ##t=0##, which when applied to a function gives the time derivative of that function.
$$ v |_{p} = \frac{dx^j}{dt} |_{t=0} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^j}|_p $$
Now, consider a smooth map, ##F: M \rightarrow N ##. Keeping with this curve-vector idea, we define the pushforward as the tangent vector to the corresponding curve on ##N##. Taking ##\alpha: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow M## to be a curve on M, ##F \circ \alpha: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow N## is the corresponding curve on N.

By definition, the pushforward of ##v## is just the tangent vector to the new curve, which we construct as usual (take the derivatives of the components of the curve, which we'll call ##F^j##, and multiply by the basis vectors on ##N##:
$$ F_*(v)|_{F(p)} = \frac{ d(F^j \circ \alpha) }{dt} |_{t=0} \frac{\partial}{\partial y^j} |_{F(p)} $$
Using the chain rule, on the first part of the right hand side, (and dropping the evaluation symbols)
$$ F_*(v) = \frac{\partial(F^j \circ \alpha) }{\partial x^k}\frac{dx^k}{dt} \frac{\partial}{\partial y^j} $$

Comparing this expression to our original expression for ##v##, we see that we get the additional Jacobian term and a new basis. If you want to reduce the relation of the pushforward of ##v## to just the pushforward on the basis vectors, take ## v = \frac{\partial}{\partial x^j} ## (for a given value of j). The pullback is simply our previous derived expression but take away the components (set the components =1)
$$ F_*\frac{\partial}{\partial x^j} = \frac{\partial (F^i \circ \alpha) }{\partial x^j} \frac{\partial}{\partial y^i} $$
 
  • Like
Likes Math Amateur
  • #4
Thanks Brian ... still reflecting on that ...

What text do you use for this theory ... ?

Peter
 
  • #5
Math Amateur said:
Thanks Brian ... still reflecting on that ...

What text do you use for this theory ... ?

Peter

Hey Peter,
As with most topics, I usually synthesize from various sources. I prefer this since you get exposed to various different explanations of a given concept (and become more familiar with a variety of notation). I would say that the main texts I'm reading through right now are Riemannian Geometry by Manfredo do Carmo and Differentiable Manifolds: A Theoretical Physics Approach by Torres del Castillo. Also, if you like seeing how geometry is applied to relativity, I'd recommend Wald's General Relativity.
 
  • Like
Likes Math Amateur
  • #6
Brian T said:
. The pullback is simply our previous derived expression but take away the components (set the components =1)
$$ F_*\frac{\partial}{\partial x^j} = \frac{\partial (F^i \circ \alpha) }{\partial x^j} \frac{\partial}{\partial y^i} $$

I am not sure I understand your notation, but the pullback and the pushforward go in opposite directions.
 
  • Like
Likes Math Amateur
  • #7
WWGD said:
I am not sure I understand your notation, but the pullback and the pushforward go in opposite directions.

Ah thanks. I typed pullback but meant pushforward

Specifically, we derived an expression for the pushforward of any vector (in coordinate basis), so the pushforward of just the basis vectors is a simple instance of the more general expression
 
  • Like
Likes Math Amateur

Related to Pushforwards in local coordinates

1. What is a pushforward in local coordinates?

A pushforward in local coordinates is a mathematical concept used in differential geometry to describe how a vector or tensor field is transformed under a change of coordinates. It is essentially a way to map the values of a vector or tensor field from one coordinate system to another.

2. How is a pushforward different from a pullback?

While a pushforward maps the values of a vector or tensor field from one coordinate system to another, a pullback maps the values of a dual vector or cotensor field in the opposite direction. In other words, a pushforward transforms the vector or tensor field itself, while a pullback transforms the coordinates or basis of the field.

3. What is the notation used for pushforwards in local coordinates?

The notation for a pushforward in local coordinates is often written as a subscripted arrow, such as F*, where F represents the mapping and the asterisk denotes that it is a pushforward. This notation is commonly used in differential geometry and tensor calculus.

4. How do pushforwards relate to coordinate transformations?

Pushforwards are closely related to coordinate transformations, as they are essentially a way to describe how a vector or tensor field changes under a change of coordinates. In fact, a pushforward can be thought of as a coordinate transformation on the tangent space at a specific point, which is why it is often referred to as a "local" coordinate transformation.

5. What are some practical applications of pushforwards in local coordinates?

Pushforwards in local coordinates have many practical applications, particularly in physics and engineering. They are used to describe the transformation of physical quantities in different coordinate systems, and are essential in the study of general relativity, fluid mechanics, and other fields where coordinate systems play a crucial role.

Similar threads

  • Differential Geometry
Replies
9
Views
749
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
2
Views
900
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
0
Views
316
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
3
Views
460
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
21
Views
975
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Back
Top